"He was a zealot of sorts, but he was a zealot... again, correct me if I'm wrong... but he didn't say, 'I want to rebuild Krypton, and then come back and destroy this little planet. All I want is to rebuild this planet. And the only reason I'm blowing everything to bits here is because you've got what I want, and you're not giving it to me. So please, give me my people, and I'll leave.'"

Blues_X:"He was a zealot of sorts, but he was a zealot... again, correct me if I'm wrong... but he didn't say, 'I want to rebuild Krypton, and then come back and destroy this little planet. All I want is to rebuild this planet. And the only reason I'm blowing everything to bits here is because you've got what I want, and you're not giving it to me. So please, give me my people, and I'll leave.'"

So he watched a different movie?

he was probably fantasizing about ways to fark up other Marvel Heroes. Maybe turn Captain America into a Ninja

Who knows. I've watched the movie three times and I'm still lost on what the movie was trying to say.

It SEEMED like a normal Superman story, where Supes was facing down a complex moral issue bounded on one side by massive devastation, uncountable death tolls, and genocide, and on the other by a tragic figure who was raised from birth and built with tailored DNA to achieve one thing, the continuation of his people by any means necessary.

Superman's struggle should have been "how do I resolve this without complete destruction of half the planet in a giant battle royale and likely killing the last Kryptonians because they're rather dead-set on their plans?" Except he didn't really struggle with this. That's the exact option he chose, because Snyder thinks that just looking heroic and good makes you heroic and good. Superman knows the difference.

Superman was always compelling when his skillset was worthless to the problems at hand. And frankly, how often is the ability to punch a bad guy in the fast faster than the speed of sound all that handy? He's famously bemoaned the fact that his natural physical potential is in fact a major limitation, the best depiction was the "World of Cardboard" speech from the Justice League cartoon.

I'm not a huge fan of Supes, but he's more than a dumb brute whose only gift is wrecking a world made of cardboard, filled with McGuffins that let him stomp around it like Godzilla. That's why the movie sucked and so many people can't recall the finer plot points that tied those McGuffins together.

ManateeGag:Blues_X: "He was a zealot of sorts, but he was a zealot... again, correct me if I'm wrong... but he didn't say, 'I want to rebuild Krypton, and then come back and destroy this little planet. All I want is to rebuild this planet. And the only reason I'm blowing everything to bits here is because you've got what I want, and you're not giving it to me. So please, give me my people, and I'll leave.'"

So he watched a different movie?

he was probably fantasizing about ways to fark up other Marvel Heroes. Maybe turn Captain America into a Ninja

Confabulat:I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

Yea, not sure where Quesada is coming from. Zod flat out states (after being asked what would happen to earth if Superman surrendered): "A foundation has to be built on something. Even your father recognized that." and then they showed a vision with millions of human skeletons all over the ground and Superman does a big "NOOOOO".

A lot of problems with that movie, but Zod's intentions were to exterminate the human race and terraform earth to Krypton standards.

scottydoesntknow:Confabulat: I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

Yea, not sure where Quesada is coming from. Zod flat out states (after being asked what would happen to earth if Superman surrendered): "A foundation has to be built on something. Even your father recognized that." and then they showed a vision with millions of human skeletons all over the ground and Superman does a big "NOOOOO".

A lot of problems with that movie, but Zod's intentions were to exterminate the human race and terraform earth to Krypton standards.

Completely true, but with a caveat. You have to imagine that to Zod, this would be like the last few humans showing up on another planet, and finding not only their salvation, but finding it full of interesting and maybe, kind-of smart ants, and one hippie telling you "No, man, the ants are, like, my friends. We should live here and make ant babies with them."

Of course we're seeing the story through our lens, but seriously, Kryptonian badasses are going to look at the situation this way. We look at it this way. We've wiped out species for less, and Kryptonians are pretty well known for being completely un-reflective of consequences.

palladiate:Completely true, but with a caveat. You have to imagine that to Zod, this would be like the last few humans showing up on another planet, and finding not only their salvation, but finding it full of interesting and maybe, kind-of smart ants, and one hippie telling you "No, man, the ants are, like, my friends. We should live here and make ant babies with them."

Except, we look so much like them, are the same size, they can speak our language and at least on their home planet of Krypton they aren't much more physically capable than us. The only real difference is scientific progress, and super power under the yellow sun. Its not that much different, and certainly not on the level of a planet populated by intelligent ants.

1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

2) Pa Kent's death. Just everything about it.

3) You have Zod, laying helpless on the ground from sensory overload, and Superman tells him EXACTLY how to deal with it. When your enemy is writhing on the ground, you don't tell him how to recover! That's like War 101.

I'm not ashamed to say I really liked Man of Steel. I thought it was a pretty cool modern take on the cheesiest of superheros.

But the Pa Kent death scene would have fit better in The Quest for Peace. It just makes no sense at all and completely confuses whatever Clark was supposed to be learning from his Earth Dad anyway. Maybe that's why he has so many issues later. He was raised by a dumbass.

palladiate:Superman was always compelling when his skillset was worthless to the problems at hand. And frankly, how often is the ability to punch a bad guy in the fast faster than the speed of sound all that handy? He's famously bemoaned the fact that his natural physical potential is in fact a major limitation, the best depiction was the "World of Cardboard" speech from the Justice League cartoon.

I'm not a huge fan of Supes, but he's more than a dumb brute whose only gift is wrecking a world made of cardboard, filled with McGuffins that let him stomp around it like Godzilla. That's why the movie sucked and so many people can't recall the finer plot points that tied those McGuffins together.

Very much this.

In fact, its why Lex Luthor in DCAU was one of Superman's most compelling villains.

I think that people really got freaked out by the realistic destruction in the third act but, I really liked the take on the Superman story. I found it refreshing to have a story that probed how Clark becomes Superman. And I really wasn't bothered by the scale of the fights given that you see that level of combat in comics all the bloody time. (But, yeah... with realistic CGI, I think it tapped into people's 9/11 zone.)

The one major complaint I have is that I just did NOT get Pa Kent's actions in this version. Honestly, I have to think of this as an alternate Superman who was raised by a really bad father who had a very weird view on what lessons his invulnerable son needed. On the other hand, it explains why Clarks perspective is a bit messed up and why it takes him time to figure out how to be a hero.

Watched it with the wife on HBOGO the other night. The movie was far from perfect but it really did have some good parts, mainly the flashbacks and Krypton prologue. They somehow managed to make Amy Adams not hot, at all. Overall it was still light years better than Superman Returns.

You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

2) Pa Kent's death. Just everything about it.

3) You have Zod, laying helpless on the ground from sensory overload, and Superman tells him EXACTLY how to deal with it. When your enemy is writhing on the ground, you don't tell him how to recover! That's like War 101.

shut_it_down:You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

Seems like they were way too myopic for such a civilized race. Seriously, did they only have one scientist and the council did not even listen to their one scientist? And what kind of planet just falls apart so quick? either Jor-El dropped the ball and found out waaaaay too late. Which will mean he sucked as a scientist (he was a good fighter though).

As long as DC keeps doing what they're doing the way they've been doing it this decade, Joey Q and Marvel come out looking golden, no mater how badly they fark up.

As I said when it was revealed that Superman/Batman was going toe-to-toe with Cap 3: DC/WB is playing chicken with Marvel here. And they don't realize that Kevin Feige is blindfolded, has the accelerator floored, and has zero farks let to give.

shut_it_down:You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

My number one problem with that movie.

MADE NO SENSE.

And every time Zod gets back on screen, I'm just reminded of how dumb it is.

RoyFokker'sGhost:As I said when it was revealed that Superman/Batman was going toe-to-toe with Cap 3: DC/WB is playing chicken with Marvel here. And they don't realize that Kevin Feige is blindfolded, has the accelerator floored, and has zero farks let to give.

Esc7:shut_it_down: You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

My number one problem with that movie.

MADE NO SENSE.

And every time Zod gets back on screen, I'm just reminded of how dumb it is.

skyotter:HawgWild: I have a theory about the next movie, since everyone likes to complain about the loss of life and wanton destruction in the first movie.

Couldn't all that destruction and loss of life be the setup for Luthor and his mission against Supes? Doesn't that give Luthor a soap box to stand on?

pretty sure that's the prevailing fan theory: Luthor vows to rebuild Metropolis, and partners with Gotham tycoon Bruce Wayne to do so. meanwhile, Batman visits Metropolis to find out more about this extra-terrestrial threat who seems to enjoy destroying Earth cities ...

I'd like to believe this theory, I really would, except for one thing:

I doubt very much that the entrenched bureaucracies of Time/Warner's Superman & Batman licensingoffices are going to allow the building of an effective DC Movie universe by the "DC Studios" creativeteam.

I hope I'm wrong, but I really haven't seen anything on the DC side that shows me that they get it theway Marvel does.

jrodr018:shut_it_down: You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

Seems like they were way too myopic for such a civilized race. Seriously, did they only have one scientist and the council did not even listen to their one scientist? And what kind of planet just falls apart so quick? either Jor-El dropped the ball and found out waaaaay too late. Which will mean he sucked as a scientist (he was a good fighter though).

And do not get me started on Pa Kent.

Again, another scene that makes no sense. The farking DOG can make it back in time, but Pa Kent can't? And there is literally no way for Superman to walk the few yards and haul him back without giving himself away? I don't buy that for a second. He pretzels someguy's truck in a parking lot in broad daylight later.GOD. SO DUMB.

And all of the Krypton stuff was so out of place in this movie. It thematically clashed and felt like an unfinished mini movie. Maybe that's why none of that stuff makes sense.

I would have been interested maybe if all the Krypton stuff was done in flashbacks, interwoven with the main plot. They could have expanded it to explain all the inconsistencies and mirrored themes back and forth between Superman and Jor-El. That at least would have been more intriguing that this movie.

I mean Superman is a morality play. And the only moral we got was "sometimes you have to kill one guy to save a bunch of others." Very limp.

Hebalo:Esc7: I mean Superman is a morality play. And the only moral we got was "sometimes you have to kill one guy to save a bunch of others." Very limp.

The film was about making choices rather than giving in to destiny.

I'll buy that. Superman's choice wasn't very interesting though. It's only shocking if you've already built up Superman as a boyscout beforehand.

I also don't understand why Zod has to exterminate Earth in order to build his new Krypton. I know he does want to, and explicitly tells Superman so, but it just seems so...pointless? Why bother? Is it the yellow sun thing I guess?

scottydoesntknow:1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

As long as DC keeps doing what they're doing the way they've been doing it this decade, Joey Q and Marvel come out looking golden, no mater how badly they fark up.

As I said when it was revealed that Superman/Batman was going toe-to-toe with Cap 3: DC/WB is playing chicken with Marvel here. And they don't realize that Kevin Feige is blindfolded, has the accelerator floored, and has zero farks let to give.

Esc7:shut_it_down: You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

My number one problem with that movie.

MADE NO SENSE.

And every time Zod gets back on screen, I'm just reminded of how dumb it is.

The movie made a point to show how colossally stupid the leadership on Krypton were. They ignored Jor-El's dire warnings against drilling to the planet core, they ignored his dire warnings that the planet was gonna blow after they started drilling, they thought reinstating the space program was folly... Sending Zod like that into exile is just another case in point.

Angela Lansbury's Merkin:Except, we look so much like them, are the same size, they can speak our language and at least on their home planet of Krypton they aren't much more physically capable than us. The only real difference is scientific progress, and super power under the yellow sun. Its not that much different, and certainly not on the level of a planet populated by intelligent ants.

That's also our viewpoint. We sometimes freak out when robots look too human. We sometimes even freak out when other real, actual humans don't fit our conceptions of humanity.

The Kryptonians were a pretty advanced race. They genetically engineered themselves, and could engineer themselves to look like anything. They've had to have had a period where they questioned what it means to be sacrosanct life and what's expendable life. Their morality concerning what's held in equal value to Kryptonian life is certainly very different than ours. Zod's was centered very much on the fact that Kryptonian life held the highest point. It would be like us killing off a wild ape preserve to maintain survival.

Fact is, it was pretty damn established in the movie Zod held the preservation of Krypton life paramount, even at the expense of their planet, the universe, while Jor-El had quite a different, more fatalistic view of Kryptonian supremacy and inclusive view of what life is sacred and worthwhile.

Until the last 1/4 of the movie, Zod's not some evil psychopath, he's very strongly motivated to do his moral duty, which is preserve Kryptonians. Then he just plays the "LOL I'M A PSYCHO" card and seems to enjoy hurting Earthlings, just so Superman can look heroic and have some moral cover.

The point is until the mess of plot that justified the battle royale, it wasn't a bad movie, and had a pretty well-done tragic villain. But the end just mad you shrug and not care that Superman snapped the guy's neck.

I liked the scenes on Krypton although I didn't understand why they didn't try to evacuate some of the populace. They had the technology and the means to save at least some. Maybe they didn't believe Krypton was going to explode?

I didn't have a problem with the mass destruction portrayed in the movie. It's HOW it was portrayed that bothers me or rather the portrayal of Superman and how he relates to it. Ok so Superman isn't a complete boyscout in this movie. He can be vindictive and petty. He's emotional at times, prone to rage, and doesn't always consider the consequences of his actions. Like when he jumped Zod at the farm and drove him through a couple cornfields bringing the fight right into the middle of downtown Smallville. He brought the fight to a populated area and left his mom alone with some other Kyptonians in the process. Not a bright idea. Total lack of concern there. And they didn't try to use her against him. Once they realized how much he cares for the people of Earth(supposedly) why wouldn't they use that against him? I thought he could have done more to at least try to mitigate some of the damage. I would have liked it if he'd displayed more concern about the destruction and loss of life during the fight in Metropolis.

Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

palladiate:Until the last 1/4 of the movie, Zod's not some evil psychopath, he's very strongly motivated to do his moral duty, which is preserve Kryptonians. Then he just plays the "LOL I'M A PSYCHO" card and seems to enjoy hurting Earthlings, just so Superman can look heroic and have some moral cover.

I just figured he was on a short fuse already, and when he saw all his hopes for a New Krypton dashed, he just had a meltdown and lashed out at Kal-El for destroying all hope for Krypton.

MechaPyx:Like when he jumped Zod at the farm and drove him through a couple cornfields bringing the fight right into the middle of downtown Smallville. He brought the fight to a populated area and left his mom alone with some other Kyptonians in the process. Not a bright idea. Total lack of concern there

If you watch that scene again, you'll see that the U.S. Military was arguably responsible for most of the destruction in Smallville.

Mad_Radhu:palladiate: Until the last 1/4 of the movie, Zod's not some evil psychopath, he's very strongly motivated to do his moral duty, which is preserve Kryptonians. Then he just plays the "LOL I'M A PSYCHO" card and seems to enjoy hurting Earthlings, just so Superman can look heroic and have some moral cover.

I just figured he was on a short fuse already, and when he saw all his hopes for a New Krypton dashed, he just had a meltdown and lashed out at Kal-El for destroying all hope for Krypton.

True enough. But that makes me dislike this Superman even more. It means that Kryptonians are invincible rage-monsters just waiting to snap like Zod. Or Superman, snapping Zod's neck.

Esc7:I also don't understand why Zod has to exterminate Earth in order to build his new Krypton.

He was focused entirely on his duty and for him the ends justify the means. Humanity meant nothing to him. All he saw was an available resource he could use to rebuild Krypton. He saw no reason to keep searching for another planet when a suitable one was right in front of him.

palladiate:Mad_Radhu: palladiate: Until the last 1/4 of the movie, Zod's not some evil psychopath, he's very strongly motivated to do his moral duty, which is preserve Kryptonians. Then he just plays the "LOL I'M A PSYCHO" card and seems to enjoy hurting Earthlings, just so Superman can look heroic and have some moral cover.

I just figured he was on a short fuse already, and when he saw all his hopes for a New Krypton dashed, he just had a meltdown and lashed out at Kal-El for destroying all hope for Krypton.

True enough. But that makes me dislike this Superman even more. It means that Kryptonians are invincible rage-monsters just waiting to snap like Zod. Or Superman, snapping Zod's neck.

Sign me up with Lex Luthor to kick him off the planet.

Or, yaknow, maybe it's just the breeding-for-aggression in the Soldier phenotype in their artificial breeding program? It's an example of Jor-El's belief that being bred for a specific purpose blinds you to other options.

scottydoesntknow:1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

Maybe the General of a future society that doesn't do a lot of hand to hand fighting?

I always preferred the Red Son story in regards to why an advanced species like the Kryptonians let their planet blow up.

They had literally accomplished everything there was to accompish. Eradicated all forms of disease, increased their lifespan to practically being immortal, even exploring the afterline as 'necronauts'. They invented everything there was possibly there to invent -- and I think their civilization reached a point where really all they could do at that point that hadn't be done yet was die.

Not unlike Superman, who can do more or less everything -- except die (well, permanently anyway).

Hebalo:scottydoesntknow: 1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

Maybe the General of a future society that doesn't do a lot of hand to hand fighting?

That doesn't jive with the "I was bred to fight and you're just a farmboy" speech during the final battle. Stop making excuses. The movie was a mess. It's fine to say you liked it, I can't disagree with that. But all these crazy twisted explanations the fans give to explain away the discrepancies like they're trying to win a no-prize doesn't help their cause.

"But maybe they will address the destruction with Luthor/Batman in the sequel." Yeah, they will now that it's become an issue. But in the movie I saw they didn't touch on it. They went to a baseball game.

palladiate:Mad_Radhu: palladiate: Until the last 1/4 of the movie, Zod's not some evil psychopath, he's very strongly motivated to do his moral duty, which is preserve Kryptonians. Then he just plays the "LOL I'M A PSYCHO" card and seems to enjoy hurting Earthlings, just so Superman can look heroic and have some moral cover.

I just figured he was on a short fuse already, and when he saw all his hopes for a New Krypton dashed, he just had a meltdown and lashed out at Kal-El for destroying all hope for Krypton.

True enough. But that makes me dislike this Superman even more. It means that Kryptonians are invincible rage-monsters just waiting to snap like Zod. Or Superman, snapping Zod's neck.

Sign me up with Lex Luthor to kick him off the planet.

every kryptonian that isn't superman, Supergirl, or power girl, is a total dick.

Fafai:Hebalo: scottydoesntknow: 1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

Maybe the General of a future society that doesn't do a lot of hand to hand fighting?

That doesn't jive with the "I was bred to fight and you're just a farmboy" speech during the final battle. Stop making excuses. The movie was a mess. It's fine to say you liked it, I can't disagree with that. But all these crazy twisted explanations the fans give to explain away the discrepancies like they're trying to win a no-prize doesn't help their cause.

"But maybe they will address the destruction with Luthor/Batman in the sequel." Yeah, they will now that it's become an issue. But in the movie I saw they didn't touch on it. They went to a baseball game.

Whoa, easy there, I was just killing time until the end of the work day.

Personally, I loved this movie. But I'm cool with people not liking it.

Confabulat:I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

His plan was to get the genetic codex from Superman's cells and use the planet building machine to terraform the planet to be closer to be like Krypton, for some reason they never bothered to explain why he had to kill everyone on Earth in order to do so instead of taking the terraforming machine to Mars. I guess he really liked the lived in look of the planet.

Lumbar Puncture:Confabulat: I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

His plan was to get the genetic codex from Superman's cells and use the planet building machine to terraform the planet to be closer to be like Krypton, for some reason they never bothered to explain why he had to kill everyone on Earth in order to do so instead of taking the terraforming machine to Mars. I guess he really liked the lived in look of the planet.

Mars was part of a cosmic HOA. Can you really say you blame him for picking Earth?

MechaPyx:Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

I know I'm late to the party, and didn't read all the posts, but yeah, I get where people are saying that it was drawn out pretty well in the scene where Kal is standing on millions of human skulls.

My problem with the whole story was (well one of) that if I recall correctly, the terraforming of other stars failed (when Zod and his crew returned from the Phantom Zone) because those colonies lost connection to Krypton when it was destroyed.

So, wouldn't this new terraformed world just essentially be another failed system?

Lumbar Puncture:Confabulat: I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

His plan was to get the genetic codex from Superman's cells and use the planet building machine to terraform the planet to be closer to be like Krypton, for some reason they never bothered to explain why he had to kill everyone on Earth in order to do so instead of taking the terraforming machine to Mars. I guess he really liked the lived in look of the planet.

The Kryptonians had sent multiple probes out to find terraformable planets, but all of those colonies failed. Earth was the only planet Zod was able to find that was an effective template.

buntz:With all the people that died, it wasn't convincing that Superman was so intent on saving the random people in the corner. It would have been more believable if Lois was one of them.

Also, why couldn't Superman just put his hand over Zod's eyes?

I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character, but I think part of the underlying tension in that scene isn't that Superman could not have momentarily saved those people by covering his eyes or what have you -- it's that nothing would have stopped him from resuming his quest to kill humanity whenever Clark eventually had to take his hands off of his eyes.

He didn't have the means to send him back to his prison, and there were no facilities around to contain someone like Zod. The momentary safety of the people was a superficial issue on top of the deeper problem that there was nothing stopping Zod from taking his genocide back up even if he was temporarily stopped that day.

buntz:With all the people that died, it wasn't convincing that Superman was so intent on saving the random people in the corner. It would have been more believable if Lois was one of them.

Also, why couldn't Superman just put his hand over Zod's eyes?

Or pick him up and fly away, or pull him down to where his eyes were turned away from the people, etc etc.

HawgWild:MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

buntz:With all the people that died, it wasn't convincing that Superman was so intent on saving the random people in the corner. It would have been more believable if Lois was one of them.

Also, why couldn't Superman just put his hand over Zod's eyes?

Maybe if Zod's death had been accidental. Like Zod's firing his heat vision, and Superman counters it by firing back with his own heat vision. Maybe Supeman is in a position of self preservation? And then it becomes a battles of wills, and in the end, Superman's proves too great, even for the inexperienced Superman to comprehend. Maybe Zod is briefly distracted by Lois, and Superman accidently fries his brain. Snyder can still have his "Superman murders" ending, but there exists sympathy for Superman on the audiences' part.

Is it really so hard to make movie rockets with realistic engines? There isn't enough power in those engines to lift a farking gnat, to hell with a giant dildo. It's not like we don't know what a rocket trail look like. But, no, they have to go with the slow cloudy shiat.

Weatherkiss:I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character,

No, I know he HAD to kill him because he would not stop, I'm just saying THAT wasn't the "last straw" as far as I'm concerned. I mean, he killed so many more people using the terraforming machine, burning 3 or 4 people (who, by the way, could have ducked under the heat vision) didn't seem like a "deal breaker"

But if Lois was the one in danger, then it makes more sense.

And I liked that this was an origin story for Superman. Pretend you never heard of the guy. So as far as we're concerned, he didn't have a "character" to go against.I like to think because he HAD to kill Zod, and how it made it feel, this is were he comes up with his 'no killing' code!

Hell, people didn't biatch this much about Burton's Batman. He killed TONS of people (Jesus, he put a bomb in a clowns pants and threw him in the sewer!!)

Angela Lansbury's Merkin:palladiate: Completely true, but with a caveat. You have to imagine that to Zod, this would be like the last few humans showing up on another planet, and finding not only their salvation, but finding it full of interesting and maybe, kind-of smart ants, and one hippie telling you "No, man, the ants are, like, my friends. We should live here and make ant babies with them."

Except, we look so much like them, are the same size

Didn't stop the US from trying to eradicate the Native Americans. Or any other colonial power from wiping out the locals.

MechaPyx:Esc7: I also don't understand why Zod has to exterminate Earth in order to build his new Krypton.

He was focused entirely on his duty and for him the ends justify the means. Humanity meant nothing to him. All he saw was an available resource he could use to rebuild Krypton. He saw no reason to keep searching for another planet when a suitable one was right in front of him.

With the yellow sun right there hey could have terraformed (kryptoformed?) Venus. It might have taken longer, but they had the technology and now the super powers.

HawgWild:MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

Okay, I'm with you on this one.

I know this is a bit of a leap, but I took that as being somewhat Kryptonite related since it had similar effects on Superman. While it was certainly not a perfect film, I don't think it defied logic for someone viewing with a reasonable superhero movie suspension of disbelief.

buntz:Weatherkiss: I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character,

No, I know he HAD to kill him because he would not stop, I'm just saying THAT wasn't the "last straw" as far as I'm concerned. I mean, he killed so many more people using the terraforming machine, burning 3 or 4 people (who, by the way, could have ducked under the heat vision) didn't seem like a "deal breaker"

But if Lois was the one in danger, then it makes more sense.

And I liked that this was an origin story for Superman. Pretend you never heard of the guy. So as far as we're concerned, he didn't have a "character" to go against.I like to think because he HAD to kill Zod, and how it made it feel, this is were he comes up with his 'no killing' code!

Hell, people didn't biatch this much about Burton's Batman. He killed TONS of people (Jesus, he put a bomb in a clowns pants and threw him in the sewer!!)

I didn't see that scene as 'the last straw', I saw it as Clark coming to the realization that no matter how much he screamed at him and tried to change his mind, Zod's mind was already made up and simply would not be changed, even as Clark knew those people would get vaporized.

To me that scene was more symbolic than literal. There was nothing stopping Clark from turning his head upwards or flying away with him or covering his eyes or the thousands of other solutions for that one possible moment.

But it was the moment where Clark would realize that no matter how much of a good person he was, and no matter how much he tried to reason with someone, particular the only other person he knew from his real homeworld, that there would be no reasoning with him -- and that if Clark knew he had the same abilities as he did, that yes, there was no other option.

Not so much 'the last straw' as Superman growing up and recognizing not everyone was as nice as he is, even if they came from the same planet and had the same powers of a God.

Lumbar Puncture:Confabulat: I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

His plan was to get the genetic codex from Superman's cells and use the planet building machine to terraform the planet to be closer to be like Krypton, for some reason they never bothered to explain why he had to kill everyone on Earth in order to do so instead of taking the terraforming machine to Mars. I guess he really liked the lived in look of the planet.

HawgWild:MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

Okay, I'm with you on this one.

It seemed to me that the sun gave Superman his superior strength, but it was the atmosphere that gave him the x-ray / heat vision and all the other sensory abilities. That's why Zod and Co. were super fast and strong while wearing suits, but as soon as they started breathing the air, it fried their senses.

Sparkimus Prime:buntz: With all the people that died, it wasn't convincing that Superman was so intent on saving the random people in the corner. It would have been more believable if Lois was one of them.

Also, why couldn't Superman just put his hand over Zod's eyes?

Maybe if Zod's death had been accidental. Like Zod's firing his heat vision, and Superman counters it by firing back with his own heat vision. Maybe Supeman is in a position of self preservation? And then it becomes a battles of wills, and in the end, Superman's proves too great, even for the inexperienced Superman to comprehend. Maybe Zod is briefly distracted by Lois, and Superman accidently fries his brain. Snyder can still have his "Superman murders" ending, but there exists sympathy for Superman on the audiences' part.

Superman kills to save himself, and you're okay with it. He kills to save a family of four, and he's a monster. This is the first time in the fight that Superman was in a dominant position over Zod while Zod was actively threatening humans. Zod knew what was coming. He committed suicide by cop, essentially.

Hebalo:MechaPyx: Like when he jumped Zod at the farm and drove him through a couple cornfields bringing the fight right into the middle of downtown Smallville. He brought the fight to a populated area and left his mom alone with some other Kyptonians in the process. Not a bright idea. Total lack of concern there

If you watch that scene again, you'll see that the U.S. Military was arguably responsible for most of the destruction in Smallville.

Even in Metropolis many of the falling buildings were from the missiles and planes crashing into buildings outside of ground zero. Superman vs zod has a single building

Hebalo:scottydoesntknow: 1) The great General Zod, leader of the Krypton armies, gets his ass handed to him by a scientist. I know there was some fluff about Jor serving under him for a while or something, but there's no way a scientist should be able to kick the ass of a military general who's entire life is dedicated to fighting and killing.

Maybe the General of a future society that doesn't do a lot of hand to hand fighting?

The General of a future society that gave up on conquering/space exploration. I doubt he did much fighting at all pre-rebellion.

buntz:Weatherkiss: I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character,

No, I know he HAD to kill him because he would not stop, I'm just saying THAT wasn't the "last straw" as far as I'm concerned. I mean, he killed so many more people using the terraforming machine, burning 3 or 4 people (who, by the way, could have ducked under the heat vision) didn't seem like a "deal breaker"

But if Lois was the one in danger, then it makes more sense.

And I liked that this was an origin story for Superman. Pretend you never heard of the guy. So as far as we're concerned, he didn't have a "character" to go against.I like to think because he HAD to kill Zod, and how it made it feel, this is were he comes up with his 'no killing' code!

Hell, people didn't biatch this much about Burton's Batman. He killed TONS of people (Jesus, he put a bomb in a clowns pants and threw him in the sewer!!)

He also blew up an entire factory filled with workers. If you count all the obvious deaths on-screen, Burton's Batman killed WAY more people than the Joker did. Joker's body count only rises if you make guesses as to how many people were killed by his cosmetic products, but we never get any numbers on that and the later scenes indicate that everyone is avoiding using cosmetic products, so people probably stopped right after Candy Walker and Amanda Keeler were shown on the news with their Smilex makeovers.

Just from memory (and it has been awhile) in the first movie Batman killed:

Several thugs in the clock towerThe JokerThe whole factory full of workersSeveral street thugs in the beginning.

Add in Returns and there are clowns, penguins, thugs, etc. added to Batman's body count.

Burton's Batman ignored Batman's "one rule" so hard that it was ridiculous. Batman was more of a murderer than the Joker and Penguin combined. Even Max Shrek only managed to turn a secretary into a superhero by pushing her into a truck full of kitty litter, while Batman blew up clowns and flashed his bat credit card around town.

buntz:Weatherkiss: I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character,

No, I know he HAD to kill him because he would not stop, I'm just saying THAT wasn't the "last straw" as far as I'm concerned. I mean, he killed so many more people using the terraforming machine, burning 3 or 4 people (who, by the way, could have ducked under the heat vision) didn't seem like a "deal breaker"

But if Lois was the one in danger, then it makes more sense.

And I liked that this was an origin story for Superman. Pretend you never heard of the guy. So as far as we're concerned, he didn't have a "character" to go against.I like to think because he HAD to kill Zod, and how it made it feel, this is were he comes up with his 'no killing' code!

Hell, people didn't biatch this much about Burton's Batman. He killed TONS of people (Jesus, he put a bomb in a clowns pants and threw him in the sewer!!)

I always wondered, Is heat vision actually visible? Like, I know we the audience could see it, but to a character in the movie would it look like Zod was just staring intently at something?

Nix Nightbird:buntz: Weatherkiss: I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character,

No, I know he HAD to kill him because he would not stop, I'm just saying THAT wasn't the "last straw" as far as I'm concerned. I mean, he killed so many more people using the terraforming machine, burning 3 or 4 people (who, by the way, could have ducked under the heat vision) didn't seem like a "deal breaker"

But if Lois was the one in danger, then it makes more sense.

And I liked that this was an origin story for Superman. Pretend you never heard of the guy. So as far as we're concerned, he didn't have a "character" to go against.I like to think because he HAD to kill Zod, and how it made it feel, this is were he comes up with his 'no killing' code!

Hell, people didn't biatch this much about Burton's Batman. He killed TONS of people (Jesus, he put a bomb in a clowns pants and threw him in the sewer!!)

He also blew up an entire factory filled with workers. If you count all the obvious deaths on-screen, Burton's Batman killed WAY more people than the Joker did. Joker's body count only rises if you make guesses as to how many people were killed by his cosmetic products, but we never get any numbers on that and the later scenes indicate that everyone is avoiding using cosmetic products, so people probably stopped right after Candy Walker and Amanda Keeler were shown on the news with their Smilex makeovers.

Just from memory (and it has been awhile) in the first movie Batman killed:

Several thugs in the clock towerThe JokerThe whole factory full of workersSeveral street thugs in the beginning.

Add in Returns and there are clowns, penguins, thugs, etc. added to Batman's body count.

Burton's Batman ignored Batman's "one rule" so hard that it was ridiculous. Batman was more of a murderer than the Joker and Penguin combined. Even Max Shrek only managed to turn a secretary into a superhero by pushing her into a truck full of kitty litter, while Batman blew up clowns and flashed his bat credit card around town.

MagSeven:buntz: Weatherkiss: I don't think that would have been a viable solution. I think Superman killing the guy was against his character,

No, I know he HAD to kill him because he would not stop, I'm just saying THAT wasn't the "last straw" as far as I'm concerned. I mean, he killed so many more people using the terraforming machine, burning 3 or 4 people (who, by the way, could have ducked under the heat vision) didn't seem like a "deal breaker"

But if Lois was the one in danger, then it makes more sense.

And I liked that this was an origin story for Superman. Pretend you never heard of the guy. So as far as we're concerned, he didn't have a "character" to go against.I like to think because he HAD to kill Zod, and how it made it feel, this is were he comes up with his 'no killing' code!

Hell, people didn't biatch this much about Burton's Batman. He killed TONS of people (Jesus, he put a bomb in a clowns pants and threw him in the sewer!!)

I always wondered, Is heat vision actually visible? Like, I know we the audience could see it, but to a character in the movie would it look like Zod was just staring intently at something?

I figure if it's not visible, you'll probably know about it when whatever it hits spontaneously combusts and/or you feel it getting closer beforehand.

On the matter of the rest of the topic...I really get the feeling that some people wouldn't have been happy unless Superman had spent three quarters of the final fight yelling "STOP! Or I'll yell stop again!" It's like no one realizes that Zod, by the final battle, was well and truly pissed off. Like, "FARK YOU AND DIE" pissed off. And he was a more experienced fighter than Superman. And he was beginning to control his reactions to Earth's atmosphere.

"Take him out over the water or desert then." Yeah, because there's no way he wouldn't just knock Superman out just long enough to go and pick up right where he left off. It's like no one understands what a person can do when he has pure, unadulterated, murderous rage driving him - and a normal person, to boot. Never mind one with superpowers.

Zod: "Hey, Kal-El, your father leave you anything that looks like this supertech flash drive? It has some data on it we need."

*superman hands over flash drive*

Zod: "Ok, sweet, thanks. If you need us, we're going to be running our terraformers over on Mars and/or Venus where we can easily rebuild our planet without bothering anybody. See ya, little buddy."

*roll credits*

---OR---

Clark: "Say, space-Dad, you know about this guy specifically, any advice on whether to trust him and how to get rid of him if not?"

Jor-El: "Why, yes. He wants this codex thing I stole, he's not going to deal in good faith, and you can retrofit your baby crib into a phantom zone portal thingy."

Clark: "Wow, good thing I came over to this ship to bring this up with you instead of talking to some random civilian with no knowledge of the problem whatsoever."

Jor-El: "Why would you have done that? You know that I have personal, detailed knowledge of Kryptonian politics and history right up to the planetsplosion, you'd have to have an IQ lower than a below-average sack of doorknobs to not come to me when confronted with Kryptonians."

Clark: "True, not sure why I was even thinking that."

*ten second scene of Superman shot-putting his baby-ship at the Kryptonian ship*

Jim_Callahan:Zod: "Hey, Kal-El, your father leave you anything that looks like this supertech flash drive? It has some data on it we need."

*superman hands over flash drive*

Zod: "Ok, sweet, thanks. If you need us, we're going to be running our terraformers over on Mars and/or Venus where we can easily rebuild our planet without bothering anybody. See ya, little buddy."

*roll credits*

---OR---

Clark: "Say, space-Dad, you know about this guy specifically, any advice on whether to trust him and how to get rid of him if not?"

Jor-El: "Why, yes. He wants this codex thing I stole, he's not going to deal in good faith, and you can retrofit your baby crib into a phantom zone portal thingy."

Clark: "Wow, good thing I came over to this ship to bring this up with you instead of talking to some random civilian with no knowledge of the problem whatsoever."

Jor-El: "Why would you have done that? You know that I have personal, detailed knowledge of Kryptonian politics and history right up to the planetsplosion, you'd have to have an IQ lower than a below-average sack of doorknobs to not come to me when confronted with Kryptonians."

Clark: "True, not sure why I was even thinking that."

*ten second scene of Superman shot-putting his baby-ship at the Kryptonian ship*

Clutch2013:Jim_Callahan: Zod: "Hey, Kal-El, your father leave you anything that looks like this supertech flash drive? It has some data on it we need."

*superman hands over flash drive*

Zod: "Ok, sweet, thanks. If you need us, we're going to be running our terraformers over on Mars and/or Venus where we can easily rebuild our planet without bothering anybody. See ya, little buddy."

*roll credits*

---OR---

Clark: "Say, space-Dad, you know about this guy specifically, any advice on whether to trust him and how to get rid of him if not?"

Jor-El: "Why, yes. He wants this codex thing I stole, he's not going to deal in good faith, and you can retrofit your baby crib into a phantom zone portal thingy."

Clark: "Wow, good thing I came over to this ship to bring this up with you instead of talking to some random civilian with no knowledge of the problem whatsoever."

Jor-El: "Why would you have done that? You know that I have personal, detailed knowledge of Kryptonian politics and history right up to the planetsplosion, you'd have to have an IQ lower than a below-average sack of doorknobs to not come to me when confronted with Kryptonians."

Clark: "True, not sure why I was even thinking that."

*ten second scene of Superman shot-putting his baby-ship at the Kryptonian ship*

It would be slightly more forgivable if Jor-El hadn't just spoon-fed them all of those plot points and technical solutions anyway. If they'd come up with literally any single part of the solution without him it would have made the idiocy of not just asking him in the first damned place significantly more forgivable and less suspension-of-disbelief breaking.

Fafai:That doesn't jive with the "I was bred to fight and you're just a farmboy" speech during the final battle. Stop making excuses. The movie was a mess. It's fine to say you liked it, I can't disagree with that. But all these crazy twisted explanations the fans give to explain away the discrepancies like they're trying to win a no-prize doesn't help their cause.

Thank you.

I hate Zack Snyder with a firey passion--he's good at making pretty images, but is so egregiously bad at directing actors (and plotting--oh my word) that it just ruins everything he touches. Because of my antipathy, I always get a lot of dismissive glares when I tell them Man of Snyder sucked. "Oh, well, you were going to hate it," they say.

Very true. But that doesn't make it any less crappy, especially when I actually watched it. The plot holes and collateral damage are my main boggle even before the Superman-killing-Zod part.

Clutch2013:.I really get the feeling that some people wouldn't have been happy unless Superman had spent three quarters of the final fight yelling "STOP! Or I'll yell stop again!"

Don't get me wrong, I LOVED Man of Steel. Loved it. But if I HAD to biatch, my only complaints would be Lois should have been in peril at the end (instead of constantly falling out of the sky). I think Lois should have been the determining factor in finally killing Zod.

And I didn't like Pa Kent. Went against everything we've ever known about him. Yes, to use my own argument against me "This was an origin story so we didn't know Pa Kent before"And if that's the case, I don't like the new Pa Kent.

AND I didn't feel Amy Adams was right for Lois. Good enough actress. But I didn't buy her as a hard-edged journalist.

FinFangFark:I know I'm late to the party, and didn't read all the posts, but yeah, I get where people are saying that it was drawn out pretty well in the scene where Kal is standing on millions of human skulls.

My problem with the whole story was (well one of) that if I recall correctly, the terraforming of other stars failed (when Zod and his crew returned from the Phantom Zone) because those colonies lost connection to Krypton when it was destroyed.

So, wouldn't this new terraformed world just essentially be another failed system?

I thought those were old outposts from a time in the past when Krypton was interested in colonizing the galaxy. They abandoned them when they instituted population control and I guess they left the former colonies to fend for themselves? Not sure why the colonists didn't just go home at that point.

Confabulat:Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Also, Michael Keaton's Batman murdered Joker.

Remember that? Why so serious?

Zod actually survived and was arrested, but that scene was cut. But yeah, Keaton did kill Joker.

Two things really bothered me about Man of Steel 1) How did supes know about the ancient ship under the ice? He just shows up, melts the ice and flys off with no explantion.2) If Kryponians were on earth thousands of years ago with a ship built specificly to terraform planets why didn't they use it then? And why not use it on Mars or something?

that one guy with the face:If Kryponians were on earth thousands of years ago with a ship built specificly to terraform planets why didn't they use it then? And why not use it on Mars or something?

I could be wrong but I thought it was just a Phantom Drive. Zod said they found the terra-forming ship at other outposts?And I assumed the Kryptonian ship hidden in the ice was sort of like Star Trek hiding and watching primitive civilizations as not to violate the Prime Directive

buntz:Clutch2013: .I really get the feeling that some people wouldn't have been happy unless Superman had spent three quarters of the final fight yelling "STOP! Or I'll yell stop again!"

Don't get me wrong, I LOVED Man of Steel. Loved it. But if I HAD to biatch, my only complaints would be Lois should have been in peril at the end (instead of constantly falling out of the sky). I think Lois should have been the determining factor in finally killing Zod.

And I didn't like Pa Kent. Went against everything we've ever known about him. Yes, to use my own argument against me "This was an origin story so we didn't know Pa Kent before"And if that's the case, I don't like the new Pa Kent.

AND I didn't feel Amy Adams was right for Lois. Good enough actress. But I didn't buy her as a hard-edged journalist.

Minor stuff.

I was too busy looking at her soft curves to care about her hard edge.

Confabulat:Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

that one guy with the face:Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Also, Michael Keaton's Batman murdered Joker.

Remember that? Why so serious?

Zod actually survived and was arrested, but that scene was cut. But yeah, Keaton did kill Joker.

Two things really bothered me about Man of Steel 1) How did supes know about the ancient ship under the ice? He just shows up, melts the ice and flys off with no explantion.2) If Kryponians were on earth thousands of years ago with a ship built specificly to terraform planets why didn't they use it then? And why not use it on Mars or something?

chewielouie:Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

Because he clearly killed them?

Why would he throw them all down a bottomless pit, yet take luthor back to jail? Because he didn't give a damn. It's also why the deleted scene doesn't change my mind. If he was already flying one criminal to jail, why not the others.

He left them to die, plain and simple.

The only cut that doesn't have Clark attempt/complete murder is the one where he does the time warp again and puts them back in the phantom zone.

chewielouie:Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

Well he left them in a hole at the North Pole. That would normally be a death sentence in the real world but in that movie, apparently there's a diner less than a mile away so they should be okay.

HawgWild:Esc7: I mean Superman is a morality play. And the only moral we got was "sometimes you have to kill one guy to save a bunch of others."

At the end of the day, most people have two arms.

At the end of the day, there are single breasted suits and double breasted suits.

At the end of the day, they don't think it be like it is, but it do.

At the end of the day there's another day dawning,And the sun in the morning is waiting to rise.And the waves crash on the sand,Like a storm that'll break any second...There's a hunger in the land,There's a reckoning still to be reckoned...And there's gonna be hell to pay,At the end of the day.

I too rooted for Zod. But that's because Superman is a horrible character with huge development limitations that be written around by a only a few very, very, good writers. All that's left is to write villains that hopefully bring more to the table than a target on their backs. Otherwise, as someone referenced up-thread, Superman's just punching cardboard.

chewielouie:Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

It's Man of Steel fans who keep saying this, so you're right about the half a brain thing. Without Man of Steel we wouldn't be talking about this. It's only brought up now as a cheap attempt at addressing the neck snap in a film 30 years later. "Well Reeves did it too so what's the problem?" No. No he didn't.

I've said it before but there's nothing about the tone of that scene that suggests he killed them. No body, no death. They disappear under some mist. It's ambiguous what happened, but they automatically jump to murder. Even with a deleted scene they still won't budge. They're trying to argue the merits of Man of Steel but since it has none beyond 'looks pretty' they have to resort to shiatting on an entirely different movie.

MechaPyx:Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

Fafai:chewielouie: Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

It's Man of Steel fans who keep saying this, so you're right about the half a brain thing. Without Man of Steel we wouldn't be talking about this. It's only brought up now as a cheap attempt at addressing the neck snap in a film 30 years later. "Well Reeves did it too so what's the problem?" No. No he didn't.

I've said it before but there's nothing about the tone of that scene that suggests he killed them. No body, no death. They disappear under some mist. It's ambiguous what happened, but they automatically jump to murder. Even with a deleted scene they still won't budge. They're trying to argue the merits of Man of Steel but since it has none beyond 'looks pretty' they have to resort to shiatting on an entirely different movie.

So...you're going to agree that no one died in the attack on Metropolis other than some soldiers?

Fafai:chewielouie: Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

It's Man of Steel fans who keep saying this, so you're right about the half a brain thing. Without Man of Steel we wouldn't be talking about this. It's only brought up now as a cheap attempt at addressing the neck snap in a film 30 years later. "Well Reeves did it too so what's the problem?" No. No he didn't.

No Line For Beer:I too rooted for Zod. But that's because Superman is a horrible character with huge development limitations that be written around by a only a few very, very, good writers. All that's left is to write villains that hopefully bring more to the table than a target on their backs. Otherwise, as someone referenced up-thread, Superman's just punching cardboard.

I always take offense at the first, especially when it's addressed by the second.

Superman is not a bad character. He just can't be written well by people who don't understand him. Joan Osbourne got to the core of who Superman a long time ago. "What if God were one of us?"

Now Superman isn't God, but the analogy works well enough. He's absolutely a being of near god-like abilities. What would a character like that living the life of a mortal do with those abilities? Why would he do what he does?

You're right that it takes an exceptional writer to do Superman well. He's not at all an easy character. But that's not the same as saying he's a bad one. He's just not constructed out of cliched conflicts like most characters. As such, he doesn't write himself as so many characters do.

Like so many people, you analyze Superman based on what he does. You reduce him to titillation and wish fulfillment value like Batman or Wolverine. That's why people think complex characters like Aquaman are boring while one-note characters like Iron Man are exciting.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that preference. I just want you to realize your reasoning is flawed.

Superman is fundamentally a transcendent being, so his problems are transcendent problems. Mundane villains with mundane motives are beneath the scope of the character. How many stories are there about Hercules beating up pickpockets? Superman getting foiled by some clown in facepaint or flamboyant serial killer is patently ridiculous. Superman's opponent is always "The Big Picture". His struggles are titanic - either against the world or against himself.

I get that some people don't like Superman. That's fair enough. But it's not because he's not a good character.

hammer85:So...you're going to agree that no one died in the attack on Metropolis other than some soldiers?

I leave it open as a possibility, sure. The entire city could have been evacuated off screen, just like Zod could have survived off screen under the mist. But in a different thread you claimed Reeve 100%, no doubt in your mind. Which goes against the work of the actual filmmakers. I'm going to trust them over you.

rocky_howard:MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

it's VERY damn clear.

If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

"You probably could have written a way around it," argued Quesada. "You could have had a better solution if you had written a better problem. " And nobody knows what it's like to have a problem to write around a problem like people who have to clean up Quesada's messes.

MechaPyx:rocky_howard: MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

it's VERY damn clear.

If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

I assume that worked the same way you or I would react if we walked into an oppressively hot area. The air's thick with whatever - moisture, particulates, etc. - and being there would be such a shock to the system, especially if it was for any extended period of time.

Clutch2013:MechaPyx: rocky_howard: MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

it's VERY damn clear.

If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

I assume that worked the same way you or I would react if we walked into an oppressively hot area. The air's thick with whatever - moisture, particulates, etc. - and being there would be such a shock to the system, especially if it was for any extended period of time.

You win a no-prize!

/you're dreaming if you think Snyder put a fraction of this much thought into it

In the '78 version, the main bit of product placement was Ma Kent pointedly setting a box of Cheerios on the table for Clark's breakfast. In Man of Steel, they have him swigging from a bottle of Budweiser. I knew this version was going to be edgier but they might have gone too far.

Clutch2013:MechaPyx: rocky_howard: MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

it's VERY damn clear.

If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

I assume that worked the same way you or I would react if we walked into an oppressively hot area. The air's thick with whatever - moisture, particulates, etc. - and being there would be such a shock to the system, especially if it was for any extended period of time.

Look folks, if you have to make shiat up to explain nonsense that lacked consistency within the continuity of a single movie, then the writers and director have done a poor job.

frestcrallen:In the '78 version, the main bit of product placement was Ma Kent pointedly setting a box of Cheerios on the table for Clark's breakfast. In Man of Steel, they have him swigging from a bottle of Budweiser. I knew this version was going to be edgier but they might have gone too far.

A part of me thought that too when I saw Routh drinking with Jimmy in Superman Returns, then I realized I was being ridiculous.

frestcrallen:In the '78 version, the main bit of product placement was Ma Kent pointedly setting a box of Cheerios on the table for Clark's breakfast. In Man of Steel, they have him swigging from a bottle of Budweiser. I knew this version was going to be edgier but they might have gone too far.

chewielouie:Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

I have a brain, and I never heard anyone claim they survived until a year or so ago.

The Kryptonians in MoS are some of the dumbest military folks in movie history. There's at least a dozen of them on Zod's ship, yet they only throw two of them at Clark in Smallville. Clark leaves his mom behind at the farm when he tackles Zod into the center of a small town, but they never use her as a hostage. Faora absolutely refuses to use her super-speed against Colonel Hardy, even when it would have stopped him from sending her fellow Kryptonians back to the Phantom Zone. What happened to that fancy EMP weapon that the Kryptonians used to shut down technology all over the planet during the "You are not alone" bit? Why weren't the Kryptonian ships launched to protect Zod's ship the second the World Engine went boom? What happened to the giant Kryptonian guy after the battle of Smallville? For people bred from birth to be warriors, they seem to be completely incompetent when it comes to matters of war

Fafai:Clutch2013: MechaPyx: rocky_howard: MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

it's VERY damn clear.

If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

I assume that worked the same way you or I would react if we walked into an oppressively hot area. The air's thick with whatever - moisture, particulates, etc. - and being there would be such a shock to the system, especially if it was for any extended period of time.

You win a no-prize!

/you're dreaming if you think Snyder put a fraction of this much thought into it

Dingleberry Dickwad:Clutch2013: MechaPyx: rocky_howard: MechaPyx: Also, when Superman is on their ship he loses his powers because he starts breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere and yet when the Kryptonians are running around in environmental suits they're breathing their own air but they still have superpowers? And he still has his powers when he's in space and not breathing anything at all so does the Earth's atmosphere give superpowers or not? I always thought it was the sun that gave him his power.

So you didn't watch the movie?

Sun and lower gravity gave them more strength.Atmosphere and sun gave them heightened senses.

it's VERY damn clear.

If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

I assume that worked the same way you or I would react if we walked into an oppressively hot area. The air's thick with whatever - moisture, particulates, etc. - and being there would be such a shock to the system, especially if it was for any extended period of time.

Look folks, if you have to make shiat up to explain nonsense that lacked consistency within the continuity of a single movie, then the writers and director have done a poor job.

For fark's sake.

I...you know what? No. I probably should argue this with you, but every time I come up with a response, it's immediately followed by this flashing in my head:

And that about sums it up. I can't even muster up enough dickishness to be a proper asshole about it - that's how tired this argument has become. Man of Steel arguments are like the gun threads of the Entertainment tab - 5-10% actual, proper debating, and the rest is just pure bullshiat.

frestcrallen:In the '78 version, the main bit of product placement was Ma Kent pointedly setting a box of Cheerios on the table for Clark's breakfast. In Man of Steel, they have him swigging from a bottle of Budweiser. I knew this version was going to be edgier but they might have gone too far.

HawgWild:frestcrallen: In the '78 version, the main bit of product placement was Ma Kent pointedly setting a box of Cheerios on the table for Clark's breakfast. In Man of Steel, they have him swigging from a bottle of Budweiser. I knew this version was going to be edgier but they might have gone too far.

Who knows. I've watched the movie three times and I'm still lost on what the movie was trying to say.

It SEEMED like a normal Superman story, where Supes was facing down a complex moral issue bounded on one side by massive devastation, uncountable death tolls, and genocide, and on the other by a tragic figure who was raised from birth and built with tailored DNA to achieve one thing, the continuation of his people by any means necessary.

Superman's struggle should have been "how do I resolve this without complete destruction of half the planet in a giant battle royale and likely killing the last Kryptonians because they're rather dead-set on their plans?" Except he didn't really struggle with this. That's the exact option he chose, because Snyder thinks that just looking heroic and good makes you heroic and good. Superman knows the difference.

Superman was always compelling when his skillset was worthless to the problems at hand. And frankly, how often is the ability to punch a bad guy in the fast faster than the speed of sound all that handy? He's famously bemoaned the fact that his natural physical potential is in fact a major limitation, the best depiction was the "World of Cardboard" speech from the Justice League cartoon.

I'm not a huge fan of Supes, but he's more than a dumb brute whose only gift is wrecking a world made of cardboard, filled with McGuffins that let him stomp around it like Godzilla. That's why the movie sucked and so many people can't recall the finer plot points that tied those McGuffins together.

scottydoesntknow:Confabulat: I thought his plan was to murder every person on Earth. But maybe I was drunk.

Yea, not sure where Quesada is coming from. Zod flat out states (after being asked what would happen to earth if Superman surrendered): "A foundation has to be built on something. Even your father recognized that." and then they showed a vision with millions of human skeletons all over the ground and Superman does a big "NOOOOO".

A lot of problems with that movie, but Zod's intentions were to exterminate the human race and terraform earth to Krypton standards.

Joe must have went to get popcorn during that part. Zod never gave Clark the option of them leaving and letting Earth be. Humans were insects to him.

You know what bugs me about Lois killing the Kryptonians while escaping from Zod's ship? She headshots a Kryptonian and kills him, but he's clearly wearing a breather mask. Zod's breather mask took plenty of punches from Superman without breaking and Faora's mask takes similar punishment, but the Kryptonian guard gets killed by one shot from Lois's sidearm...why?

Clutch2013:Man of Steel arguments are like the gun threads of the Entertainment tab - 5-10% actual, proper debating, and the rest is just pure bullshiat.

Dingleberry and I brought up that it is a movie created by people who are not flawless beings. This is 'bullshiat' to people who think Superman had no other choice as though his free will was real and the plot of the movie was not pretermined. Fine. I'll argue to the point as though the movie were real.

Clutch2013:MechaPyx: If the atmosphere only affects their senses then why was he so weak after breathing the ship's atmo? And when Jor-El tweaks the ship's atmo back to Earth normal he regains his strength.

I assume that worked the same way you or I would react if we walked into an oppressively hot area. The air's thick with whatever - moisture, particulates, etc. - and being there would be such a shock to the system, especially if it was for any extended period of time.

You're saying the atmosphere didn't take away his strength, but it was thick enough to suppress it? This atmopshere is playing havok on his entire system, without affecting the super strength he got from soaking in the sun, despite it being the natural atmosphere he was born to breathe as a Kryptonian? I call BS.

Sweet Chin Music:You know what bugs me about Lois killing the Kryptonians while escaping from Zod's ship? She headshots a Kryptonian and kills him, but he's clearly wearing a breather mask. Zod's breather mask took plenty of punches from Superman without breaking and Faora's mask takes similar punishment, but the Kryptonian guard gets killed by one shot from Lois's sidearm...why?

Well Man of Steel was the better non Batman DC movies to come out but nothing will ever top the first Superman for me. The Donner cut of Supes II is pretty great too.

Its got to just drive DC nuts that Marvel is doing so well even without its two largest comics moneymakers in Spiderman and The X-Men. That would be like Time/Warner not having Supes and Bats to make movies with.

But then I might be biased. DC lost me since the reboot. Well since the new head took over and let Dan Didio off the leash a year or so before the NuDC..

In this story, Superman travels to an alternate universe where Zod, Non, and Ursa have killed everyone and are threatening to find a way to kill even more. He even used the gold kryptonite first to strip their superpowers, but they said they'd eventually reverse that somehow.

hammer85:Fafai: chewielouie: Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

It's Man of Steel fans who keep saying this, so you're right about the half a brain thing. Without Man of Steel we wouldn't be talking about this. It's only brought up now as a cheap attempt at addressing the neck snap in a film 30 years later. "Well Reeves did it too so what's the problem?" No. No he didn't.

I've said it before but there's nothing about the tone of that scene that suggests he killed them. No body, no death. They disappear under some mist. It's ambiguous what happened, but they automatically jump to murder. Even with a deleted scene they still won't budge. They're trying to argue the merits of Man of Steel but since it has none beyond 'looks pretty' they have to resort to shiatting on an entirely different movie.

So...you're going to agree that no one died in the attack on Metropolis other than some soldiers?

jrodr018:shut_it_down: You know what I never understood? Krypton was falling apart everybody knew it. Yet, they sent the insurrectionists to a safe place instead of... I don't know... absolutely anybody else. You really want to punish Zod? Doom him to die on the planet along with everyone else. Send some nice Kryptonians to netherspace or whatever it's called so that they can survive.

Seems like they were way too myopic for such a civilized race. Seriously, did they only have one scientist and the council did not even listen to their one scientist? And what kind of planet just falls apart so quick? either Jor-El dropped the ball and found out waaaaay too late. Which will mean he sucked as a scientist (he was a good fighter though).

I always loved his art style and still have some posters of Xmen characters with art deco touches that I like. Some great detail and line work, in my opinion. If he was an artist on a book I'd always be sure to preorder it.

Then he became the big cheese somehow, and no more art.

Then he was going to draw a book again! Daredevil I think it was? He was trying to out-Frank Miller Frank Miller and it was nothing like his decent work. That was the last time I knew of that he tried to get back to being an artist.

Confabulat:nitefallz: In the script and a deleted scene they were arrested. They lost their powers but didn't fall into nothingness.

Well I don't watch early versions of scripts. Otherwise we'd be here talking about Anakin Starkiller today.

That's fair. But if you're going to insist on a strict adherence to what happened on screen, then you don't know that they were killed any more than I know that they weren't. We saw them fall a distance that wouldn't seriously injure anybody, and then... we don't know. If you are insisting that they died, and that Superman just callously let them fall to their deaths, then that's entirely on you. Me, I tend to believe that the fog indicates some kind of cryogenic stasis field. On my side I have the entire tone of the movie and the fact that Superman spent the whole movie (and the one before) showing that he values life. What is it on your side that leads you to your conclusion?

Gawain:Confabulat: nitefallz: In the script and a deleted scene they were arrested. They lost their powers but didn't fall into nothingness.

Well I don't watch early versions of scripts. Otherwise we'd be here talking about Anakin Starkiller today.

That's fair. But if you're going to insist on a strict adherence to what happened on screen, then you don't know that they were killed any more than I know that they weren't. We saw them fall a distance that wouldn't seriously injure anybody, and then... we don't know. If you are insisting that they died, and that Superman just callously let them fall to their deaths, then that's entirely on you. Me, I tend to believe that the fog indicates some kind of cryogenic stasis field. On my side I have the entire tone of the movie and the fact that Superman spent the whole movie (and the one before) showing that he values life. What is it on your side that leads you to your conclusion?

We didn't see Zod buried. It's possible Superman just Reeve'ed him. I mean that's the arguments you are making to try and argue that Superman didn't intend to kill them/leave them to die. Hell, I can argue Pa Kent is still alive. After all, no body, no death. They never found his body from the tornado, if you noticed he disappeared as soon as the tornado ran over him. I believe that he was sent to Earth-2.

And the side that leads me to the conclusion is that you have 3 Krpyto-humans and Lex in a room that have been very naughty. You break one of the Kyrpto-humans hands, then toss all of them into a pit o death. Then take Lex to prison. This kind and caring superman then immediately flies over and beats up a trucker for being mean to him earlier.

Which is why the Donner cut makes no sense. So he threw Zod and Co into the pit to later be picked up by artic police...why wouldn't he have done that to Lex too? And if he was just turning him over to police, why wouldn't he just take zod and co with lex to prison?

Gawain:Superman spent the whole movie (and the one before) showing that he values life.

Except the trucker whom he let break his hand punching him, spun him to sickness, humiliated him by sticking his ass on a the counter in a plate of mashed potatoes and then threw him into a pinball machine (possibly causing back problems and at the very least lacerations from the broken glass, but this part is of course speculation)

I was going to ask what exactly did Lex do that was illegal but then I remember he busted out of prison earlier so nevermind.

I thought Superman just left Lex there. But like I said, there's apparently civilization less than a mile away from the North Pole or else powerless Clark and Lois would have frozen to death before they got to the diner. And apparently one of them knows how to hot wire a car.

Gawain:Me, I tend to believe that the fog indicates some kind of cryogenic stasis field.

What in the movie lead you to believe that, rather than just the more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths? I can't imagine having to make up an alternate version of what I saw on screen.

No one thought it was particularly shocking for Superman to kill people in the 70s. We were a harder people then, I guess.

hammer85:Which is why the Donner cut makes no sense. So he threw Zod and Co into the pit to later be picked up by artic police...why wouldn't he have done that to Lex too? And if he was just turning him over to police, why wouldn't he just take zod and co with lex to prison?

Clearly Supes and Lex have a secret thing for each other. In the first Spider-Man movie, he saves MJ at the fair, has a perfect chance to put her down safely and go after the goblin, but instead he takes his time and swings leisurely to a nice pretty rooftop because he wants to show off and spend some along time with her. Same thing.

And you're only proving my point by talking about Zod's dead body and Pa Kent in Man of Steel before anything else when answering a question about why you think Reeves killed anyone in Superman 2. Do you see what I mean? You guys can't talk about one movie without the other. You make it this weird contest. You come across as quite rabid. It's just movies. It's ok.

I don't think anyone is saying that Superman wasn't a jerk to the trucker, but he did throw the first punch. And that violence, like a lot of it in the film, was light-hearted and slapsticky. Cartoonish. Because it's essentially an adaptation of a cartoon. Dropping guys down a "pit of death" is not light-hearted and cartoonish. It doesn't fit with the rest of the film.

Mugato:But like I said, there's apparently civilization less than a mile away from the North Pole or else powerless Clark and Lois would have frozen to death before they got to the diner.

This is what I'm saying. Any kind of danger or violence or catastrophe is downplayed throughout the entire movie (even the deadly Arctic weather conditions), except for when the plot needs it to be serious when Zod and Ursa pick up the bus full of people. Even Zod, the main villain, didn't seem to want to hurt anybody, he just had this weird thing about everyone kneeling to him. He could have been a great ruler for all we know.

But in a movie where everything is kept light and fun except where absolutely necessary by the plot, and the worst the bad guys do is kill an astronaut or two just to show the audience they're badass before going on their pathetic rampage of blowing up empty cars, making a guy levitate before dropping him ten feet onto the ground, and then insisting everyone kneel, we're supposed to believe the hero murdered them in cold blood and then smiled and chuckled with his girlfriend about it without any hint of mania or sadism as this heroic music plays in the background. Seems legit.

Fafai:Even Zod, the main villain, didn't seem to want to hurt anybody, he just had this weird thing about everyone kneeling to him. He could have been a great ruler for all we know.

I've always said that. Once he took over, he didn't really fark with anyone. They all just sat around the White House, bored. And unlike Superman, Zod wouldn't put up with any terrorism shiat or countries invading each other or nuclear war.

If they had just one scene of Superman removing the wreckage, helping to rescue the injured or recovering the dead from the collapsed buildings - anything like this at the end of the movie, it would have substantially curtailed the sting of watching all the carnage beforehand. Instead the very next scene we have after Lois' comforts him after killing Zod is Superman destroying a twenty million dollar surveillance satellite. Joy.

I really enjoyed Man of Steel. It's definitely not perfect, but most of the arguments people have against it can be solved with a little bit of "Pay farking attention next time" and a fair amount of "I want to enjoy my time at the theater so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt." The only argument that holds weight is "I just didn't like it," because most everything else can be debated, and you can't really argue opinion. All the Internet bantering in the world won't make someone who likes it hate it, or make someone who hates it like it.

But it's fun to be a dick and make fun of stuff. It's not a perfect movie, maybe not even a great movie. But it's the closest thing I've seen to the Superman movie I wanted to see, and I'm excited about the next one.

ExcedrinHeadache:I really enjoyed Man of Steel. It's definitely not perfect, but most of the arguments people have against it can be solved with a little bit of "Pay farking attention next time" and a fair amount of "I want to enjoy my time at the theater so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt." The only argument that holds weight is "I just didn't like it," because most everything else can be debated, and you can't really argue opinion. All the Internet bantering in the world won't make someone who likes it hate it, or make someone who hates it like it.

But it's fun to be a dick and make fun of stuff. It's not a perfect movie, maybe not even a great movie. But it's the closest thing I've seen to the Superman movie I wanted to see, and I'm excited about the next one.

It's one thing to suspend your disbelief to enjoy a movie. it's another when you still do it but the movie then decides to say "FARK YOUR DISBELIEF!" (i.e. Pa Kent's death)

That was Man of Steel's problem. I'm all for what you stated, but when the movie decides to take said viewer's disbelief and spit it back in your face, then the movie loses it's credibility.

Rwa2play:ExcedrinHeadache: I really enjoyed Man of Steel. It's definitely not perfect, but most of the arguments people have against it can be solved with a little bit of "Pay farking attention next time" and a fair amount of "I want to enjoy my time at the theater so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt." The only argument that holds weight is "I just didn't like it," because most everything else can be debated, and you can't really argue opinion. All the Internet bantering in the world won't make someone who likes it hate it, or make someone who hates it like it.

But it's fun to be a dick and make fun of stuff. It's not a perfect movie, maybe not even a great movie. But it's the closest thing I've seen to the Superman movie I wanted to see, and I'm excited about the next one.

It's one thing to suspend your disbelief to enjoy a movie. it's another when you still do it but the movie then decides to say "FARK YOUR DISBELIEF!" (i.e. Pa Kent's death)

That was Man of Steel's problem. I'm all for what you stated, but when the movie decides to take said viewer's disbelief and spit it back in your face, then the movie loses it's credibility.

Rwa2play:It's one thing to suspend your disbelief to enjoy a movie. it's another when you still do it but the movie then decides to say "FARK YOUR DISBELIEF!" (i.e. Pa Kent's death)

That was Man of Steel's problem. I'm all for what you stated, but when the movie decides to take said viewer's disbelief and spit it back in your face, then the movie loses it's credibility.

But Pa Kent's action were 100% in line with his character in the film. He didn't want Clark to be found out, so he told him not to help. Clark obeyed, and then spent years dealing with the consequence of that. He even farking says that in the film.

"I let my father die because I trusted him. Because he was convinced that I had to wait. That the world was not ready. What do you think? "

Hebalo:Rwa2play: It's one thing to suspend your disbelief to enjoy a movie. it's another when you still do it but the movie then decides to say "FARK YOUR DISBELIEF!" (i.e. Pa Kent's death)

That was Man of Steel's problem. I'm all for what you stated, but when the movie decides to take said viewer's disbelief and spit it back in your face, then the movie loses it's credibility.

But Pa Kent's action were 100% in line with his character in the film. He didn't want Clark to be found out, so he told him not to help. Clark obeyed, and then spent years dealing with the consequence of that. He even farking says that in the film.

"I let my father die because I trusted him. Because he was convinced that I had to wait. That the world was not ready. What do you think? "

This. Whether it was a great moment or not, it was consistent with his character. Pa Kent would rather die than risk Clark being found out... which he would have, with all those people watching when it happened. To save his dad, Clark would have had to show off his super-speed and his invulnerability to tornado-force winds... all of which still might not have saved his dad, since he couldn't fly at that point and would have been picked up and tossed about by the tornado, anyway.

Pa Kent knew that if he was found out, Clark's life would never be the same. The government might be after him, religious people might camp out outside the house, but no matter what, he wouldn't be able to live a life pretending to be normal. Pete's mom proved that after the bus incident. Pa Kent's whole move was, "You can't do these things, because people will find out, and they can't handle it." Clark even says, "You mean I should let people die?" and Kent goes, "Maybe?" His death answers that question, at least in Kent's eyes.

I agree it's a tenuous scene at best, but it's not inconsistent, unless you're allowing previous versions of Pa Kent and the Superman story to color your comprehension of this film. But this is another point at which paying attention will answer the Whys of it, even if you might not like the result.

Hebalo:Rwa2play: It's one thing to suspend your disbelief to enjoy a movie. it's another when you still do it but the movie then decides to say "FARK YOUR DISBELIEF!" (i.e. Pa Kent's death)

That was Man of Steel's problem. I'm all for what you stated, but when the movie decides to take said viewer's disbelief and spit it back in your face, then the movie loses it's credibility.

But Pa Kent's action were 100% in line with his character in the film. He didn't want Clark to be found out, so he told him not to help. Clark obeyed, and then spent years dealing with the consequence of that. He even farking says that in the film.

"I let my father die because I trusted him. Because he was convinced that I had to wait. That the world was not ready. What do you think? "

Except no rational human being would let it happen; that's where my bone of contention lies. It would've made more sense to have Clark off-screen saving someone while the tornado makes an abrupt shift towards Pa and he had no time to react.

And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

ExcedrinHeadache:Hebalo: Rwa2play: It's one thing to suspend your disbelief to enjoy a movie. it's another when you still do it but the movie then decides to say "FARK YOUR DISBELIEF!" (i.e. Pa Kent's death)

That was Man of Steel's problem. I'm all for what you stated, but when the movie decides to take said viewer's disbelief and spit it back in your face, then the movie loses it's credibility.

But Pa Kent's action were 100% in line with his character in the film. He didn't want Clark to be found out, so he told him not to help. Clark obeyed, and then spent years dealing with the consequence of that. He even farking says that in the film.

"I let my father die because I trusted him. Because he was convinced that I had to wait. That the world was not ready. What do you think? "

This. Whether it was a great moment or not, it was consistent with his character. Pa Kent would rather die than risk Clark being found out... which he would have, with all those people watching when it happened. To save his dad, Clark would have had to show off his super-speed and his invulnerability to tornado-force winds... all of which still might not have saved his dad, since he couldn't fly at that point and would have been picked up and tossed about by the tornado, anyway.

Pa Kent knew that if he was found out, Clark's life would never be the same. The government might be after him, religious people might camp out outside the house, but no matter what, he wouldn't be able to live a life pretending to be normal. Pete's mom proved that after the bus incident. Pa Kent's whole move was, "You can't do these things, because people will find out, and they can't handle it." Clark even says, "You mean I should let people die?" and Kent goes, "Maybe?" His death answers that question, at least in Kent's eyes.

I agree it's a tenuous scene at best, but it's not inconsistent, unless you're allowing previous versions of Pa Kent and the Superman story to color your comprehension of this film. But this is another ...

Problem is it doesn't make sense. Say you were given a gift like that and saw a loved one in peril but said loved one said "Don't do it because people will look at you different," would you just stand there and do nothing?

Rwa2play:Problem is it doesn't make sense. Say you were given a gift like that and saw a loved one in peril but said loved one said "Don't do it because people will look at you different," would you just stand there and do nothing?

IMHO it makes Clark look less human instead of more human.

Forgot to add: It also damages Clark's psyche and IMHO makes Pa Kent sound cold to me. Why would you condemn your child to the trauma of seeing you die and you telling him he should do nothing about it?

Alphax:chewielouie: Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

I have a brain, and I never heard anyone claim they survived until a year or so ago.

So, you thought Lois was a murderer as well? Nice "brain" you got there.

chewielouie:Alphax: chewielouie: Confabulat: Christopher Reeve's Superman also murdered Zod and his associates you know. I wonder why people forget that.

Why do some people keep saying this? Even without knowing a scene were deleted, I never got the impression that Zod and company died when I saw the movie in theaters. I don't think anyone with at least half a brain got that impression.

I have a brain, and I never heard anyone claim they survived until a year or so ago.

So, you thought Lois was a murderer as well? Nice "brain" you got there.

Rwa2play:And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

PIP_the_TROLL:Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

Well, damn. We all knew it felt wrong and argued for months but this is the best breakdown so far.

PIP_the_TROLL:Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

BINGO~! Also, if people start spouting off about some guy flying through the air at incredible speed to save his dad, what do you think the EMTs/cops respond to that?

"Sir/Ma'am, you're experiencing shock because of a traumatic event that you just experienced."

PIP_the_TROLL:Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

Now, see this? This. Makes. Sense. I love this answer. None of this "Zack Snyder can EABOD" shiat that's posing as token criticism. I can look at this and go, "Hmm. I've never thought of it that way. But now that I have, that actually lines up very well."

Thank you for that. I'm dead serious.

Next question: Superman vs. Zod - what's your take (in case I've missed it)? I feel that all of these "move the battle elsewhere" comments wouldn't pan out, especially given how viciously insane Zod was at that point.

PIP_the_TROLL:Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

"All those things I could do. All those powers. And there was nothing I could do to save him."

It's a powerful moment in that film.

What bothers me most about Jonathan Kent's death in MoS is that it plays more like a suicide.

Clutch2013:PIP_the_TROLL: Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

Now, see this? This. Makes. Sense. I love this answer. None of this "Zack Snyder can EABOD" shiat that's posing as token criticism. I can look at this and go, "Hmm. I've never thought of it that way. But now that I have, that actually lines up very well."

Thank you for that. I'm dead serious.

Next question: Superman vs. Zod - what's your take (in case I've missed it)? I feel that all of these "move the battle elsewhere" comments wouldn't pan out, especially given how viciously insane Zod was at that point.

peterthx:PIP_the_TROLL: Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

"All those things I could do. All those powers. And there was nothing I could do to save him."

It's a powerful moment in that film.

What bothers me most about Jonathan Kent's death in MoS is that it plays more like a suicide.

And farking up Clark's mind at the same time~! Think about it: you're watching your parent die right in front of you and s/he just told you to do nothing about it~!

PIP_the_TROLL:Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

THIS. Especially since with his super speed he could have easily saved Jonathan and NO ONE would have seen anything. Stupid scene was stupid.

I thought the movie was decent as I watched it. I got what Pa Kent was about. I liked the flashback story style. Thought the overall tone was great. Generally I could feel Nolan's influence on giving the story a real world grounding. Explaining how his powers developed and matured over time, showing him dealing with those changes. It worked.

BUT I was immediately snapped out of the movie when the new Kyptonians are equal to Kal in mere minutes of showing up. Kal was shown to be their perfect genetic code holder, or Superman, and it took him FARKING YEARS to establish his abilities. That's what the movie showed us. The second they stopped playing by their own carefully crafted rules, that they shoved in my face for an hour, I just didn't give a shiat anymore. All for the huge fight. Other than the neck snap (which while out of normal character, made sense in the movie presented) the rest of the movie was blur for me. It lost my interest.

Clutch2013:Superman vs. Zod - what's your take (in case I've missed it)? I feel that all of these "move the battle elsewhere" comments wouldn't pan out, especially given how viciously insane Zod was at that point.

Zod would kill humans at the first available opportunity and wouldn't stop until he had that mountain of skulls the film foreshadows.

The problem is that MOS Zod is not traditional Zod. Traditional Zod is a run of the mill megalomaniac. MOS Zod is a hero.

I mean this in the Greek sense.

Zod is forged by Krypton's genetic god to be the protector of the Kryptonian ideal. The people only matter inasmuch as they are the manifestation of that ideal. Everything Zod does is ethically and morally correct from that perspective.

Kal-El is an abomination. He's born outside of the Codex. Outside of God's Plan as it were. To then vest in this abomination the essence of the Codex is sacrilege of the highest order.

Zod was always going to kill Kal-El, whether he'd given him the Codex or not. Killing Earth was punishment for Kal-El's very existence. Humanity had given this abomination shelter. It had given him succor. It had even turned him against his people.

Terraforming Earth wasn't only an expedient way to punish Kal-El, it was a ritual way of wiping away the stain of Kal-El's perversion and restoring the Kryptonian Ideal. From the perspective of Joe Krypton, if Zod had won it would have been as predictable and as right as Perseus slaying Medusa.

Superman could have and should have tried to move the fight of the city, but if he didn't kill Zod or find some other way to incapacitate him Zod was still going to kill every human he came across.

chewielouie:PIP_the_TROLL: Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

THIS. Especially since with his super speed he could have easily saved Jonathan and NO ONE would have seen anything. Stupid scene was stupid.

Even if people were to have seen it, the EMTs arriving post-tornado would've attributed it as "shock" and not believed it. Since people react differently to a traumatic event that affects them directly.

MaxTigar:I thought the movie was decent as I watched it. I got what Pa Kent was about. I liked the flashback story style. Thought the overall tone was great. Generally I could feel Nolan's influence on giving the story a real world grounding. Explaining how his powers developed and matured over time, showing him dealing with those changes. It worked.

BUT I was immediately snapped out of the movie when the new Kyptonians are equal to Kal in mere minutes of showing up. Kal was shown to be their perfect genetic code holder, or Superman, and it took him FARKING YEARS to establish his abilities. That's what the movie showed us. The second they stopped playing by their own carefully crafted rules, that they shoved in my face for an hour, I just didn't give a shiat anymore. All for the huge fight. Other than the neck snap (which while out of normal character, made sense in the movie presented) the rest of the movie was blur for me. It lost my interest.

That goes to my point of suspending your belief towards a movie. If a writer follows their logic throughout the movie, no problem. The minute you jump out of it because "OMG, BIG FIGHT SCENE NEEDED!" you screw up your own internal logic and the movie goes to hell for you.

PIP_the_TROLL:This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman.

In the original movie! This is never an issue in the comics.

That was something, a line, a sentence they created FOR the movie.

As much as I enjoyed the original, people have to stop referring to it as Superman canon!

/Don't get me wrong, I agree the tornado was stupid. And I agree they changed Pa Kent from every iteration in the comics (In my opinion the Costner Pa Kent was cowardly) and I didn't like it. But the "With all my powers, I couldn't save him" is purely a Donner invention drama

PIP_the_TROLL:Clutch2013: Superman vs. Zod - what's your take (in case I've missed it)? I feel that all of these "move the battle elsewhere" comments wouldn't pan out, especially given how viciously insane Zod was at that point.

Zod would kill humans at the first available opportunity and wouldn't stop until he had that mountain of skulls the film foreshadows.

The problem is that MOS Zod is not traditional Zod. Traditional Zod is a run of the mill megalomaniac. MOS Zod is a hero.

I mean this in the Greek sense.

Zod is forged by Krypton's genetic god to be the protector of the Kryptonian ideal. The people only matter inasmuch as they are the manifestation of that ideal. Everything Zod does is ethically and morally correct from that perspective.

Kal-El is an abomination. He's born outside of the Codex. Outside of God's Plan as it were. To then vest in this abomination the essence of the Codex is sacrilege of the highest order.

Zod was always going to kill Kal-El, whether he'd given him the Codex or not. Killing Earth was punishment for Kal-El's very existence. Humanity had given this abomination shelter. It had given him succor. It had even turned him against his people.

Terraforming Earth wasn't only an expedient way to punish Kal-El, it was a ritual way of wiping away the stain of Kal-El's perversion and restoring the Kryptonian Ideal. From the perspective of Joe Krypton, if Zod had won it would have been as predictable and as right as Perseus slaying Medusa.

Superman could have and should have tried to move the fight of the city, but if he didn't kill Zod or find some other way to incapacitate him Zod was still going to kill every human he came across.

This is my only point of contention. Everything else is spot on - one of the things I liked about Man of Steel was that it made Zod rather sympathetic and almost (almost) an anti-hero of sorts, up until the point he snaps.

Back to the point of contention - and I have to go back and look at the final fight for specifics - but at one point, through either his own machinations or just dumb luck, Superman does get Zod out of Metropolis and into space, achieving that goal. Zod's immediate response is to throw him into the LexCorp (or Wayne Enterprises) satellite and send both himself and Superman crashing back to Metropolis. Honestly, that scene alone should have illustrated just how much of a non-option moving the fight out became with each passing second. And I think there were other points in the fight where he didn't even get that far - he'd go to stop him and end up getting punted through something as a result.

Clutch2013:Zod's immediate response is to throw him into the LexCorp (or Wayne Enterprises) satellite and send both himself and Superman crashing back to Metropolis. Honestly, that scene alone should have illustrated just how much of a non-option moving the fight out became with each passing second

I'll need to diverge from you slightly here. Yes, you're right that Superman didn't have control of Zod during that fight, but what he did have was Zod's attention.

Zod was a clear and present threat to the humans - but he wasn't an immediate one. His focus was on Kal-El. While he may not have been able to force Zod out of Metropolis, he almost certainly could have lured him out.

The circumstances of why they stayed in the city do make sense within the context of the movie, I'm just saying that even within that context there was still an alternative.

PIP_the_TROLL:Clutch2013: Zod's immediate response is to throw him into the LexCorp (or Wayne Enterprises) satellite and send both himself and Superman crashing back to Metropolis. Honestly, that scene alone should have illustrated just how much of a non-option moving the fight out became with each passing second

I'll need to diverge from you slightly here. Yes, you're right that Superman didn't have control of Zod during that fight, but what he did have was Zod's attention.

Zod was a clear and present threat to the humans - but he wasn't an immediate one. His focus was on Kal-El. While he may not have been able to force Zod out of Metropolis, he almost certainly could have lured him out.

The circumstances of why they stayed in the city do make sense within the context of the movie, I'm just saying that even within that context there was still an alternative.

OK, I'll accept that. But going back to what you said earlier may provide a reason as to why he didn't take that alternative - that it was likely that realization that Zod would not stop until he had inflicted as much loss of life as he could. For Superman, maybe that plan B was a losing proposition or no proposition at all. The movie doesn't explicitly address this, either as an oversight (maybe) or because the writers assumed we, the audience, would have been smart or informed enough to come to that conclusion anyway.

PIP_the_TROLL:No Line For Beer: I too rooted for Zod. But that's because Superman is a horrible character with huge development limitations that be written around by a only a few very, very, good writers. All that's left is to write villains that hopefully bring more to the table than a target on their backs. Otherwise, as someone referenced up-thread, Superman's just punching cardboard.

I always take offense at the first, especially when it's addressed by the second.

Superman is not a bad character. He just can't be written well by people who don't understand him. Joan Osbourne got to the core of who Superman a long time ago. "What if God were one of us?"

Now Superman isn't God, but the analogy works well enough. He's absolutely a being of near god-like abilities. What would a character like that living the life of a mortal do with those abilities? Why would he do what he does?

You're right that it takes an exceptional writer to do Superman well. He's not at all an easy character. But that's not the same as saying he's a bad one. He's just not constructed out of cliched conflicts like most characters. As such, he doesn't write himself as so many characters do.

Like so many people, you analyze Superman based on what he does. You reduce him to titillation and wish fulfillment value like Batman or Wolverine. That's why people think complex characters like Aquaman are boring while one-note characters like Iron Man are exciting.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that preference. I just want you to realize your reasoning is flawed.

Superman is fundamentally a transcendent being, so his problems are transcendent problems. Mundane villains with mundane motives are beneath the scope of the character. How many stories are there about Hercules beating up pickpockets? Superman getting foiled by some clown in facepaint or flamboyant serial killer is patently ridiculous. Superman's opponent is always "The Big Picture". His struggles are titanic - either against the world or agai ...

I stand by my opinion. Superman as created, is a two-dimensional cardboard character. In the same vein, that 80's cartoon villains are evil simply because the heroes need someone to overcome, Superman was sold as a simple good to fight the real, complicated evils that existed in the world. He's a walking dues ex machnica by design. I've little doubt if Jerry Siegel had any inclination that we would be discussing the character 75+ years later, he'd have provided a little more room for growth but he didn't. But the stories were about overcoming facism and communism and corruption. They were always about the people/ideals he was fighting against and for. They weren't about Superman.

All the characteristics you that list, only go to serve my point. They've been added over the years by a few very talented writers. Part of the problem is the one that you mention, you can't fall on the anti-hero cliches. But the largest part is that writing for Superman is like writing for zombies.

Decillion:PIP_the_TROLL: Rwa2play: And it would've been a great callback to "S:TM" where Clark couldn't save Pa after he suffered a heart attack.

Jonathan Kent dying of a heart attack is critical to the development of Superman for a very specific reason. A reason that stupidly dying in a tornado can't hope to replicate. The tornado thing is stupid enough on the face of it, and it totally misses the point.

Clark's father dying of a heart attack is crucial because it's so ordinary. It wasn't a meteor from space or a mugger in a dark alley - Clark could stop those. Johnathan Kent dies because he's weak and frail. Johnathan Kent dies because he's human.

And with all the gifts Clark has, he can do nothing to prevent it.

This creates a pivotal moment in the development of Clark Kent becoming Superman. It welds him to humanity like nothing else could possibly do. It creates in him a drive to protect humanity from its own frailty.

A stupid tornado doesn't do that.

Well, damn. We all knew it felt wrong and argued for months but this is the best breakdown so far.

Clutch2013:OK, I'll accept that. But going back to what you said earlier may provide a reason as to why he didn't take that alternative - that it was likely that realization that Zod would not stop until he had inflicted as much loss of life as he could. For Superman, maybe that plan B was a losing proposition or no proposition at all. The movie doesn't explicitly address this, either as an oversight (maybe) or because the writers assumed we, the audience, would have been smart or informed enough to come to that conclusion anyway.

I think that the reason is much simpler than that because who we're talking about is Superman.

I think the reason was that right up until that last second where he decided to snap Zod's neck,Superman was still trying to save Zod from himself. One could almost imagine Superman hyperventilating, awash in full panic attack at the prospect of killing Zod.

And I'm going to give you a very roundabout reason why I think that.

Recall, if you may, the riots in London a year or two ago. Went on for what... a week... ten days? Something like that.

I live in the Cayman Islands, a British colony. I work with a guy from Denver. He asked me after it was resolved why it had taken the police in Britain so long to respond effectively. He pointed out, rightly so, that if the same thing had happened in New York or LA, the response would have been quicker and much stronger.

What I explained to him was that England isn't the United States. England is a very orderly society in a very old fashioned sort of way. So much so that they did experiments where they had a few people line up in front of a random door only to see pedestrians line up behind them without a clue why they were doing it. As our hero points out in Hitchiker's Guide, the English queue very well.

Propriety is very much a strong part of English cultural DNA even in this day and age.

So what i pointed out to my Coloradan friend was that in the early days of this riot, the average Englishman was paralyzed by his sense of propriety. They looked at what was happening and were literally dumbstruck. The way the people were acting was so outside the norm that they didn't know how to respond. "Any minute now these people are going to notice how they're reacting, feel embarrassed and stop." - that's what everybody thought.

Superman often falls victim to this sort of propriety. He sees in people an image of their better nature and has a great deal of trouble dispensing with that image when faced with a darker reality. It isn't naivete, per se. It's more like an emotional blindness.

So all the while that Zod is causing devastation, perhaps Superman was screaming in his own mind, "I can save him. I can save him."

Confabulat: Gawain: Me, I tend to believe that the fog indicates some kind of cryogenic stasis field.

What in the movie lead you to believe that, rather than just the more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths? I can't imagine having to make up an alternate version of what I saw on screen.

Yes, I shouldn't have thrown that in there, I don't know what I was thinking, this being the Internet and all. Allow me to rephrase, and to reiterate the actually relevant parts that you are studiously ignoring.

They fell to an unspecified fate, that is the pure fact that we are both starting from. I believe it was a non-lethal fate, and I base that on the fact that Superman showed nothing but reverence for life throughout the movie. To have him (and Lois, for that matter, as she drops Ursa) suddenly murder people in cold blood while smiling genially would be such an extreme reversal of character that honestly (and I do mean that, honestly) it never even crossed my mind.

So, for the third time: I'm curious what it is you see in the movie that makes you believe that it is the "more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths". Because I don't see that as obvious at all. If you can, please answer this time without evading or trying to redirect the conversation.

buntz:Gawain: Superman spent the whole movie (and the one before) showing that he values life.

Except the trucker whom he let break his hand punching him, spun him to sickness, humiliated him by sticking his ass on a the counter in a plate of mashed potatoes and then threw him into a pinball machine (possibly causing back problems and at the very least lacerations from the broken glass, but this part is of course speculation)

You own speculations aside, I fail to see the connection between a slapstick cartoon violence sequence (this is a superhero movie, after all), and cold-blooded murder. If you think those two things are equivalent, or even closely related, then I think I see the source of our dispute.

Confabulat:I just don't understand what the point of Pa Kent's death scene was supposed to be.

I thought it was to completely cement the idea that it was better for Clark to hide his powers than to risk being a target by people who might fear him if they knew he was an alien, and that Pa Kent felt it was worth sacrificing himself to keep to keep Clark safe rather than expose that secret. I agree with the assessment that all this does is make him feel like less human though, and regardless of the reasoning it's not like Clark is all that careful about keeping his powers on the down low which makes Pa Kent's sacrifice look even more ridiculous.

Lumbar Puncture:Confabulat: I just don't understand what the point of Pa Kent's death scene was supposed to be.

I thought it was to completely cement the idea that it was better for Clark to hide his powers than to risk being a target by people who might fear him if they knew he was an alien, and that Pa Kent felt it was worth sacrificing himself to keep to keep Clark safe rather than expose that secret. I agree with the assessment that all this does is make him feel like less human though, and regardless of the reasoning it's not like Clark is all that careful about keeping his powers on the down low which makes Pa Kent's sacrifice look even more ridiculous.

Most amusing part of the whole movie however.

Pa's death is why superman goes by superman and not Clark. Even when surrendering himself to humanity, he didn't give away his identity because he still believed what pa said about being seen as different and scared of, and "standing in front of the human race".

Pa's wisdom is why Clark has a secret identity, and changes it throughout the movie after he displays his powers

PIP_the_TROLL:Superman often falls victim to this sort of propriety. He sees in people an image of their better nature and has a great deal of trouble dispensing with that image when faced with a darker reality. It isn't naivete, per se. It's more like an emotional blindness.

So all the while that Zod is causing devastation, perhaps Superman was screaming in his own mind, "I can save him. I can save him."

I think he was enamored with the idea of finding some of his people and he'd been clinging to some romantic idea of who they were based on the image of Jor-El. He really wanted them to be better than they were and right up until the end was struggling to reconcile this with the reality of who and what Zod was before coming to the realization they weren't like his father and never would be. He couldn't save them, couldn't reunite with them, wasn't going to get the chance to live among them and so he did what he had to.

Clutch2013:I feel that all of these "move the battle elsewhere" comments wouldn't pan out, especially given how viciously insane Zod was at that point.

During the entire fight he was simply reacting. He didn't attempt to control the battle at all. I think they should have at least attempted to show Superman trying to actively mitigate the damage even if it was ultimately futile because that's the kind of person Superman is.

Gawain:So, for the third time: I'm curious what it is you see in the movie that makes you believe that it is the "more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths". Because I don't see that as obvious at all. If you can, please answer this time without evading or trying to redirect the conversation

I don't think I'm evading you. My little boy self assumed they were killed. Back in the 70s and 80s, heroes in movies killed people all the time. With guns even. How many people did Indiana Jones kill? Han Solo? Batman?

In short, I assumed they were dead because they were tossed in a seemingly bottomless pit with no powers. If there was a bottom surely they broke apart upon impact. And if it was a crazy force field or something, how would Lois Lane know? She hated that biatch and I was as happy as Lois to watch her die.

It's really the only way the movie ever appeared to me. Why would I have invented a new scene in my mind to explain that away? Made sense. Those guys were evil and deserved to die.

MechaPyx:Clutch2013: I feel that all of these "move the battle elsewhere" comments wouldn't pan out, especially given how viciously insane Zod was at that point.

During the entire fight he was simply reacting. He didn't attempt to control the battle at all. I think they should have at least attempted to show Superman trying to actively mitigate the damage even if it was ultimately futile because that's the kind of person Superman is.

Superman did that throughout the Smallville fight whenever he got a breather, and then ended up getting pummeled for it.

Zod relentlessly beat the ever living shiat out of Superman until he got the upper hand in the station. Right before the space scene you see him pounded through a building and being completely disoriented,

PIP_the_TROLL:So what i pointed out to my Coloradan friend was that in the early days of this riot, the average Englishman was paralyzed by his sense of propriety. They looked at what was happening and were literally dumbstruck. The way the people were acting was so outside the norm that they didn't know how to respond. "Any minute now these people are going to notice how they're reacting, feel embarrassed and stop." - that's what everybody thought.

That explains the civilian population, but what about the police? One would think they would have a much different response due to training.

Confabulat:Gawain: So, for the third time: I'm curious what it is you see in the movie that makes you believe that it is the "more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths". Because I don't see that as obvious at all. If you can, please answer this time without evading or trying to redirect the conversation

I don't think I'm evading you. My little boy self assumed they were killed. Back in the 70s and 80s, heroes in movies killed people all the time. With guns even. How many people did Indiana Jones kill? Han Solo? Batman?

In short, I assumed they were dead because they were tossed in a seemingly bottomless pit with no powers. If there was a bottom surely they broke apart upon impact. And if it was a crazy force field or something, how would Lois Lane know? She hated that biatch and I was as happy as Lois to watch her die.

It's really the only way the movie ever appeared to me. Why would I have invented a new scene in my mind to explain that away? Made sense. Those guys were evil and deserved to die.

I think you're still evading me, because I never asked about your little boy self, I'm asking you now with a (presumably) fully functional adult brain capable of considering the movie on its own terms and inferring author/director intent.

Also, you list a bunch of other action movie heroes, but you're only making my point. In their respective movies those characters killed quite often - for them to then kill the bad guy at the end of the movie is not at all out of character. That is not the case in Superman II. He goes out of his way to preserve life at all turns. And if killing bad guys was his style, he could have wasted Lex Luthor at any time literally just by looking at him.

Engaging your brain and examining the scene now, in the context of the movie that it appears in, do you really think the intent of the writers and director is that Superman just suddenly became a cold-blooded killer for no reason, in his moment of victory? That doesn't seem at all out of character and out of tone with the rest of the movie to you?

Gawain:Confabulat: Gawain: So, for the third time: I'm curious what it is you see in the movie that makes you believe that it is the "more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths". Because I don't see that as obvious at all. If you can, please answer this time without evading or trying to redirect the conversation

I don't think I'm evading you. My little boy self assumed they were killed. Back in the 70s and 80s, heroes in movies killed people all the time. With guns even. How many people did Indiana Jones kill? Han Solo? Batman?

In short, I assumed they were dead because they were tossed in a seemingly bottomless pit with no powers. If there was a bottom surely they broke apart upon impact. And if it was a crazy force field or something, how would Lois Lane know? She hated that biatch and I was as happy as Lois to watch her die.

It's really the only way the movie ever appeared to me. Why would I have invented a new scene in my mind to explain that away? Made sense. Those guys were evil and deserved to die.

I think you're still evading me, because I never asked about your little boy self, I'm asking you now with a (presumably) fully functional adult brain capable of considering the movie on its own terms and inferring author/director intent.

Also, you list a bunch of other action movie heroes, but you're only making my point. In their respective movies those characters killed quite often - for them to then kill the bad guy at the end of the movie is not at all out of character. That is not the case in Superman II. He goes out of his way to preserve life at all turns. And if killing bad guys was his style, he could have wasted Lex Luthor at any time literally just by looking at him.

Engaging your brain and examining the scene now, in the context of the movie that it appears in, do you really think the intent of the writers and director is that Superman just suddenly became a cold-blooded killer for no reason, in his moment of victory? That doesn ...

If he cared so much about life he wouldn't just casually throw them down a farking pit in the first place. And Lois clearly doesn't know whats down there, which makes even less sense that shes like YAY EVERYONE IN THE PIT!

Gawain:Confabulat: Gawain: So, for the third time: I'm curious what it is you see in the movie that makes you believe that it is the "more obvious conclusion that he dumped them to their deaths". Because I don't see that as obvious at all. If you can, please answer this time without evading or trying to redirect the conversation

I don't think I'm evading you. My little boy self assumed they were killed. Back in the 70s and 80s, heroes in movies killed people all the time. With guns even. How many people did Indiana Jones kill? Han Solo? Batman?

In short, I assumed they were dead because they were tossed in a seemingly bottomless pit with no powers. If there was a bottom surely they broke apart upon impact. And if it was a crazy force field or something, how would Lois Lane know? She hated that biatch and I was as happy as Lois to watch her die.

It's really the only way the movie ever appeared to me. Why would I have invented a new scene in my mind to explain that away? Made sense. Those guys were evil and deserved to die.

I think you're still evading me, because I never asked about your little boy self, I'm asking you now with a (presumably) fully functional adult brain capable of considering the movie on its own terms and inferring author/director intent.

Also, you list a bunch of other action movie heroes, but you're only making my point. In their respective movies those characters killed quite often - for them to then kill the bad guy at the end of the movie is not at all out of character. That is not the case in Superman II. He goes out of his way to preserve life at all turns. And if killing bad guys was his style, he could have wasted Lex Luthor at any time literally just by looking at him.

Engaging your brain and examining the scene now, in the context of the movie that it appears in, do you really think the intent of the writers and director is that Superman just suddenly became a cold-blooded killer for no reason, in his moment of victory? That doesn ...

Absolutely. Did Lois Lane know about some mysterious force field? Even if Superman knew, I doubt he had time to tell her. That makes her a killer-by-intent anyway.

But still. The movie, as presented (I don't care about deleted scenes, they are not in the movie and don't get to count) shows Superman apparently letting three people fall to their deaths.

Lois didn't know wtf was down there and she was just following his lead. She wouldn't have cared whether they died or what. But Lois isn't the hero. She's mortal and defending her own life. She's laughing and happy because she's just relieved to be alive and have it all over with. Not the same thing as Superman killing depowered foes.

Before I knew of any deleted scene I just figured he had them imprisoned because in the comics they always show he has live specimens of different species from all over the universe kept in his weird zoo down there. It explains why he only took Luthor to jail. These guys aren't human, they're too dangerous for earth jail. The risk of their powers coming back is too great. He can keep a closer eye on them there, probably intends to put them back in the zone. ...This thread, it never ends.

/It just keeps going. It feels like days. I can't believe it's not over yet.//What is things Fafai said while watching Man of Steel?///Correct.

Confabulat:Absolutely. Did Lois Lane know about some mysterious force field? Even if Superman knew, I doubt he had time to tell her. That makes her a killer-by-intent anyway.But still. The movie, as presented (I don't care about deleted scenes, they are not in the movie and don't get to count) shows Superman apparently letting three people fall to their deaths.I do not think I have some minority opinion on this.

You do. Not for a minute did I think in 1981 that they died.

Neither did Bryan Singer who planned to have Zod advise Superman against Metallo in his version of Man Of Steel.

peterthx:Fafai: peterthx: Bryan Singer who planned to have Zod advise Superman against Metallo in his version of Man Of Steel.

We would've had a Metallo before Brainiac in a movie? That's weird.

I meant Brainiac (oops). Both Metallo & Braniac were planned to be the villains of that film.

I take it this was to be the sequel to Superman Returns before it was released and critically panned? As cool as Brainiac would be, we didn't really need 6 movies all in the same continuity with the characters inexplicably getting younger and younger. Hell, we didn't need 3.